I run a pretty tight ship and have been with my bank for years. On the one occasion I went overdrawn by a few pounds for a day, I spoke to the bank and recieved a sensible response and a full refund immediately.
That said, I would have equally accepted that it was my mistake and the terms and costs are clearly advertised.
I have a bank account in france and pay monthly charges for the privalage of having it.
I have no overdraft facility (they are frowned upon in France) so if people want to keep free banking in the uk they should manage their accounts better and not blame others for their own poor money management.
Similar with me, went overdrawn (this was the time I discovered debits are actioned before credits), and got a full refund after a short discussion with bank. I would be fuming if the courts decision had gone the other way, and that resulted in no more free banking.
Why are people getting so angry, it's about an 'unauthorised' overdraft. You shouldn't be doing It !........ Live within your means !
I had realised that money in my account was running low but I had deposited a cheque to tide me over. The account went into the red on the same day as the cheque cleared and as the cheque cleared later in the day I was charged 25 pounds. A simple phone call and a sensible person at the other end agreed that both transactions had happened on the same day and it was the first time I had gone into the red. She refunded the money.
I had realised that money in my account was running low but I had deposited a cheque to tide me over. The account went into the red on the same day as the cheque cleared and as the cheque cleared later in the day I was charged 25 pounds. A simple phone call and a sensible person at the other end agreed that both transactions had happened on the same day and it was the first time I had gone into the red. She refunded the money.
I have inadvertently been charged on the odd occasion in the past, but each time the bank rectified the charge with recognising that I was not at fault.
On the whole, I agree with charges, particularly for overdrafts and necessary administration (letters). When a bank account is opened, it is made quite clear that the account always in credit will not attract charges. These charges are, in some part, necessary to allow for interest to be given to prudent people who live within their means, which, obviously, means going without for those who have holes burning in their pockets and the addiction for debt with ......... tomorrow!
I submitted a claim not so long ago for my son, who openend a Lloyds current account. Despite showing 1 1/2 years of payslips, NO overdraft facilities were granted. Very soon after that his direct debit for his O2 came thru and of course there was not enough money in the bank so Lloyds bounced the request, and charged my son £35.= for the trouble. This has happened a few times as well as other overdrawn "excursions", totalling in just over 2 years to £283.= As a poor student this is a lot of money for a 19 year old.
The recent high court decision is absolutely unbelieveable (and will mean they will not pay up) and I can only think of writing to my MP to get justice, meanwhile big bonuses are being paid to senior Bank Management and secret money's invested in (hopefully) profitable projects like Barclays with £18.6bn secret investment in Dubai's economy.... and with the recent revelations, yesterday, made the FTSE drop by 7.4%! "Please bank with us, because we will give your money away either in bonuses or doubtful investments..."
Ultimately the High Court decision has approved the extortionate charges to continue! vote with your feet and leave the bank you are withand write to your MP!
I had arranged for a large bill to be paid by direct debit, but due to my being busy with other things, didn't transfer the money to cover it from my savings account into my current account. I realised the problem the following morning, transferred the money into the account, then phoned the bank. I told them the circumstances and asked if the overdraft charges were 'negotiable'. I acknowledged that the mistake was my own. They agreed that the overdraft was 'out of character', said they could not reduce the charges but could, on this one occassion waive them completely.
My account is with the Halifax. Their new scale of charges for customers using unauthorised overdrafts suits me very well. A small charge for one day would have been wholly acceptable to me.
Quicksilver.747 can't be the only one in this position, and whilst they can't turn back the clock..,
Placed in the same position, when his son opened the account I would have found the money to put £100 into the account (to act as an overdraft) and pointing out it was MY money and it was never to be spent (accepting that it inevitably would)
I accept that not everyone can afford to stump up £100 just like that.., but it could also be argued that you cannot afford not to if it ends up costing £230 instead!
One wouldn't take money from a friend without asking, why should it be acceptable to take it from an institution? The institutions have kindly accepted that mistakes sometimes happen and they have clearly advertised that in those circumstances they will not look to prosecute for theft.., but they will levy their own penalties, the scale of which are laid out for all to see.
If I were to steal a 50p pack of gum from a shop I would not expect to be allowed to keep the gum and recieve a 50p fine at court.
I cannot see how a court can legislate against bank charges, it is after all what they do every day. (Except, they make up the fines as they see fit on the day!)
Looking at the results so far I would suggest that if the question had been asked differently, the public would vote in support bank charges. Even some of us who have been charged accept it was our own fault, and the majority have been prudent enough to ensure that it hasn't happened.
Bank charges - I understand that the banks have won the final (but not the last) stage in the Supreme Court. This is quite surprising as there has already been apparantly, a £560 million payout and a number of banks (including some catalogues/store cards) have reduced their fees to £12…. It seemed to me that this only led to one conclusion (considering the huge media attention). How can they go back to their former position or remain where they are ?…. (bearing in mind the time that has already been spent on this by the customer and themselves on administration among other demands). The argument to me made a lot of sense and was straightforward and coherent, or else they wouldn’t have followed it in the first place….
I have had a number of successful refunds and am still waiting for one more outcome (this is a first claim). I have kept a track of this in the news.
Drawing money from an account which has no credit balance is Theft, you should plead guilty and pay the penality the same as if you were caught speeding.
The issue is probably more the cost of items sent to customer - £30 a letter that is extortionate and daylight robbery - if a fairer system of charges were brought in then a lot of people would probably back down their claims, as its about being treated fairly - yes they should be refunded for unfair charges. But if they were told about these charges when they sign on the dotted line there really is no comeback. What needs to be done is fairer charges need to be brought in now! The system at the moment is hurting the most vulnerable people - this needs to change - the banks in this way are contributing to someones debt by piling on loads of charges, when they should be working with that person responsibly and finding ways to help them out of debt. Yes some people won't listen and will keep igronring the bank, but those who cooperate and try to sort they're debts out should only be charged a reasonable amount - the banks can still make money, it just needs to be more balanced and fair.
The issue is probably more the cost of items sent to customer - £30 a letter that is extortionate and daylight robbery - if a fairer system of charges were brought in then a lot of people would probably back down their claims, as its about being treated fairly - yes they should be refunded for unfair charges. But if they were told about these charges when they sign on the dotted line there really is no comeback. What needs to be done is fairer charges need to be brought in now! The system at the moment is hurting the most vulnerable people - this needs to change - the banks in this way are contributing to someones debt by piling on loads of charges, when they should be working with that person responsibly and finding ways to help them out of debt. Yes some people won't listen and will keep igronring the bank, but those who cooperate and try to sort they're debts out should only be charged a reasonable amount - the banks can still make money, it just needs to be more balanced and fair.
£30 for an automatic letter isn't fair - I've not recieved one yet but anyone can see this is an unfair charge. Cost of paper - nomnal amount, work involved in generating letter probably £5 at most - postage 33p. £30 is a huge and extorionate mark up - its easy for those who have enough to live on this is a fair charge, but to penalise people who do they're best to stay in credit and go into debt through no fault of they're own is unfair.
I am in support of fair and reasonable charges not unreasonable ones like £35 for letting you know of a bounced payment or for a letter from the bank this is unreasonable - it penalises people trying to work themselves out of debt.
I just got charged £5 for NOT putting any money in my account for December. I didn't GET any money in December to put into the account and Santander have obnoxious staff on the phones, and managers can't be bothered to call me back... I agree unauth'd OD's are chargeable, but being charged for not actually having enough money strikes me as appalling.
Mine is a yes vote.
I run a pretty tight ship and have been with my bank for years. On the one occasion I went overdrawn by a few pounds for a day, I spoke to the bank and recieved a sensible response and a full refund immediately.
That said, I would have equally accepted that it was my mistake and the terms and costs are clearly advertised.
I have a bank account in france and pay monthly charges for the privalage of having it.
I have no overdraft facility (they are frowned upon in France) so if people want to keep free banking in the uk they should manage their accounts better and not blame others for their own poor money management.
Similar with me, went overdrawn (this was the time I discovered debits are actioned before credits), and got a full refund after a short discussion with bank. I would be fuming if the courts decision had gone the other way, and that resulted in no more free banking.
Why are people getting so angry, it's about an 'unauthorised' overdraft. You shouldn't be doing It !........ Live within your means !
I was charged 25 pounds for being inadevrtently one day late with a payment owing to an intervening Bank Holiday Monday
I was charged 25 pounds for being inadevrtently one day late with a payment owing to an intervening Bank Holiday Monday
I had realised that money in my account was running low but I had deposited a cheque to tide me over. The account went into the red on the same day as the cheque cleared and as the cheque cleared later in the day I was charged 25 pounds. A simple phone call and a sensible person at the other end agreed that both transactions had happened on the same day and it was the first time I had gone into the red. She refunded the money.
I had realised that money in my account was running low but I had deposited a cheque to tide me over. The account went into the red on the same day as the cheque cleared and as the cheque cleared later in the day I was charged 25 pounds. A simple phone call and a sensible person at the other end agreed that both transactions had happened on the same day and it was the first time I had gone into the red. She refunded the money.
I have inadvertently been charged on the odd occasion in the past, but each time the bank rectified the charge with recognising that I was not at fault.
On the whole, I agree with charges, particularly for overdrafts and necessary administration (letters). When a bank account is opened, it is made quite clear that the account always in credit will not attract charges. These charges are, in some part, necessary to allow for interest to be given to prudent people who live within their means, which, obviously, means going without for those who have holes burning in their pockets and the addiction for debt with ......... tomorrow!
I submitted a claim not so long ago for my son, who openend a Lloyds current account. Despite showing 1 1/2 years of payslips, NO overdraft facilities were granted. Very soon after that his direct debit for his O2 came thru and of course there was not enough money in the bank so Lloyds bounced the request, and charged my son £35.= for the trouble. This has happened a few times as well as other overdrawn "excursions", totalling in just over 2 years to £283.= As a poor student this is a lot of money for a 19 year old.
The recent high court decision is absolutely unbelieveable (and will mean they will not pay up) and I can only think of writing to my MP to get justice, meanwhile big bonuses are being paid to senior Bank Management and secret money's invested in (hopefully) profitable projects like Barclays with £18.6bn secret investment in Dubai's economy.... and with the recent revelations, yesterday, made the FTSE drop by 7.4%! "Please bank with us, because we will give your money away either in bonuses or doubtful investments..."
Ultimately the High Court decision has approved the extortionate charges to continue! vote with your feet and leave the bank you are withand write to your MP!
I had arranged for a large bill to be paid by direct debit, but due to my being busy with other things, didn't transfer the money to cover it from my savings account into my current account. I realised the problem the following morning, transferred the money into the account, then phoned the bank. I told them the circumstances and asked if the overdraft charges were 'negotiable'. I acknowledged that the mistake was my own. They agreed that the overdraft was 'out of character', said they could not reduce the charges but could, on this one occassion waive them completely.
My account is with the Halifax. Their new scale of charges for customers using unauthorised overdrafts suits me very well. A small charge for one day would have been wholly acceptable to me.
Quicksilver.747 can't be the only one in this position, and whilst they can't turn back the clock..,
Placed in the same position, when his son opened the account I would have found the money to put £100 into the account (to act as an overdraft) and pointing out it was MY money and it was never to be spent (accepting that it inevitably would)
I accept that not everyone can afford to stump up £100 just like that.., but it could also be argued that you cannot afford not to if it ends up costing £230 instead!
One wouldn't take money from a friend without asking, why should it be acceptable to take it from an institution? The institutions have kindly accepted that mistakes sometimes happen and they have clearly advertised that in those circumstances they will not look to prosecute for theft.., but they will levy their own penalties, the scale of which are laid out for all to see.
If I were to steal a 50p pack of gum from a shop I would not expect to be allowed to keep the gum and recieve a 50p fine at court.
I cannot see how a court can legislate against bank charges, it is after all what they do every day. (Except, they make up the fines as they see fit on the day!)
Looking at the results so far I would suggest that if the question had been asked differently, the public would vote in support bank charges. Even some of us who have been charged accept it was our own fault, and the majority have been prudent enough to ensure that it hasn't happened.
No, I do not work in the financial industry!
I have had a number of successful refunds and am still waiting for one more outcome (this is a first claim). I have kept a track of this in the news.
Drawing money from an account which has no credit balance is Theft, you should plead guilty and pay the penality the same as if you were caught speeding.
The issue is probably more the cost of items sent to customer - £30 a letter that is extortionate and daylight robbery - if a fairer system of charges were brought in then a lot of people would probably back down their claims, as its about being treated fairly - yes they should be refunded for unfair charges. But if they were told about these charges when they sign on the dotted line there really is no comeback. What needs to be done is fairer charges need to be brought in now! The system at the moment is hurting the most vulnerable people - this needs to change - the banks in this way are contributing to someones debt by piling on loads of charges, when they should be working with that person responsibly and finding ways to help them out of debt. Yes some people won't listen and will keep igronring the bank, but those who cooperate and try to sort they're debts out should only be charged a reasonable amount - the banks can still make money, it just needs to be more balanced and fair.
The issue is probably more the cost of items sent to customer - £30 a letter that is extortionate and daylight robbery - if a fairer system of charges were brought in then a lot of people would probably back down their claims, as its about being treated fairly - yes they should be refunded for unfair charges. But if they were told about these charges when they sign on the dotted line there really is no comeback. What needs to be done is fairer charges need to be brought in now! The system at the moment is hurting the most vulnerable people - this needs to change - the banks in this way are contributing to someones debt by piling on loads of charges, when they should be working with that person responsibly and finding ways to help them out of debt. Yes some people won't listen and will keep igronring the bank, but those who cooperate and try to sort they're debts out should only be charged a reasonable amount - the banks can still make money, it just needs to be more balanced and fair.
£30 for an automatic letter isn't fair - I've not recieved one yet but anyone can see this is an unfair charge. Cost of paper - nomnal amount, work involved in generating letter probably £5 at most - postage 33p. £30 is a huge and extorionate mark up - its easy for those who have enough to live on this is a fair charge, but to penalise people who do they're best to stay in credit and go into debt through no fault of they're own is unfair.
I am in support of fair and reasonable charges not unreasonable ones like £35 for letting you know of a bounced payment or for a letter from the bank this is unreasonable - it penalises people trying to work themselves out of debt.
I just got charged £5 for NOT putting any money in my account for December. I didn't GET any money in December to put into the account and Santander have obnoxious staff on the phones, and managers can't be bothered to call me back... I agree unauth'd OD's are chargeable, but being charged for not actually having enough money strikes me as appalling.